Sport-Specific Arbitration in Canada: A Qualitative Investigation of Four Athletes' Perceptions of the Fairness of the Process

This thesis explored Canadian high performance Athletes' perceptions of the fairness of the SDRCC sport-specific arbitral process. Leventhal’s (1980) model of procedural justice judgment was found to be an effective tool for exploring Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process. Five of his six procedural justice antecedents: consistency, bias suppression, accuracy of information, representativeness, and ethicality influenced the Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process. Emergent data also revealed that the Athletes’ perceptions of fairness were also influenced by three contextual factors and an additional antecedent of procedural justice. Efficiency of the process, inherent power imbalance between Athletes and NSOs, and the measurable effect of the process on personal and professional relationships differentiate sport-specific arbitration from most other processes of allocation. The data also indicated that the opportunity to voice one’s case was also an important determinant of the Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process.